For psychologists and mental health workers to devote themselves to the topic of political repression and violence is a relatively new departure. There can be fewdictators and death squads exceptedwho will not welcome this sign of their concern and commitment. From the pages of this issue of the International Journal of Mental Health, we obtain a refreshing corrective to the image of professionals complacently lining their pockets on the largely self-created problems of affluent Western societies. We see here research undertaken out of a genuine sense of identification with the oppressed, often carried out far from the comfortable surroundings of the laboratory or consulting room, and sometimes at considerable personal and professional risk. In such company, is not a psychologist a superfluous guest? In this article I shall argue that a critical stance in relation to one's own profession can only enhance the effectiveness of this work. Simply by undertaking it, in factby striking out into areas that are far removed from the daily bread-and-butter of the helping professionsthe authors in this journal issue have already assumed such a stance. Psychological studies of political repression and violence have until now been few and far between. The names of Lifton, Bettelheim, and the Soviet dissidents who have dealt with nuclear war, concentration camps, and political abuses of psychiatry are deservedly well known. However, this work does not constitute a tradition on anything like the same scale as the veritable industries that deal with relational disorders,